The international community entered Afghanistan with Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001 to oust the Taliban. It promised reconstruction and democracy. Seven years on it is negotiating with the Taliban.

Details of the negotiations were revealed by Jason Burke in the Observer last month. The talks are said to have been initiated by the Afghan government and led by the national security adviser, Zalmei Rassul, approved by the French, MI6, the British Foreign Office and the Saudi king before being implemented by a man as yet unnamed.

Later, a French weekly reported comments attributed to the British ambassador in Kabul, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, advocating "an acceptable dictator" to rule Afghanistan. Then reports confirmed that the UN special representative in Afghanistan, Kai Eide of Norway, is also backing the idea of negotiations with the Taiban and advocating their taking up cabinet posts. The Taliban obviously have the upper hand and have put forward 11 demands, including having their members in cabinet posts.

These steps will have devastating consequences for Afghanistan and will discredit the international community beyond repair. The suggestion being voiced by some of our top international advocates of democracy is disrespectful to the people of Afghanistan. Imagine if you told Americans that the US wants to negotiate with al-Qaida and have a few of them in high-ranking posts in the administration. Would anyone dare to say that in the US? If not, then how is it that the interntional community permits itself to play that scenario for Afghanistan?

Has the world forgotten what the Taliban and their allies did to Afghanistan in the space of six years? They devastated the country, humiliated the nation, punished, tortured and killed Afghan men and women and tormented the young. Are we saying that the most powerful armies of the world were unable to defeat a few thousand tribal fighters? Are the top international men of peace running out of ideas? You cannot advocate "good governance" and then support an Afghan cabinet with Taliban members in key posts.

One of the main mediators in the negotiations with the Taliban is the notorious warlord, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. For more than 10 years he was one of the main culprits in the wars that raged in Afghanistan. He entered into hundreds of loose alliances, inflaming an already desperate situation. He was at the time responsible for the fall of Kabul to the Taliban. And now he is aiding their entry to Kabul for a second time. He has already placed in the Afghan cabinet one of his loyal supporters and the Taliban are asking for several more ministerial posts. There will be no end to these demands and there will be no reciprocal action.

Continuing high levels of unemployment and severe poverty are among the main reasons why young men join the Taliban. A lucrative narcotics business is also continuing to fund the Taliban's terrorist activity. So would it not be more appropriate if the international community focused on creating jobs, eradicating poverty and fighting the production of narcotics?

The International Crisis Group reported in July that the Taliban have created a "sophisticated communications apparatus that projects an increasingly confident movement". It said the Taliban are using a full range of media, "successfully tapping into strains of Afghan nationalism and exploiting policy failures by the Kabul government and its international backers". Is the international community doing anything to counter that propaganda?

Leaders of the latest brands of Taliban, recently interviewed by international media have openly confessed they work for the Taliban because their "pay and conditions" are far better than any other work they can find in Afghanistan. People are desperate due to unemployment and poverty. Are these the Taliban that the international community is referring to as "moderate" Taliban? If not who are these "moderate" Taliban? Why are their names not announced? Are they the ones who destroyed the statutes of Buddha in Bamyan, or those killing hundreds of international forces in southern Afghanistan, or perhaps the ones taking people hostage and placing roadside bombs in main highways? Or it might be their other new major partner, Jalaluddin Haqqani, who is based in Waziristan in the tribal areas.

The people of Afghanistan have been watching with horror the return of the Taliban since 2003, not only to the southern and eastern provinces but also to new areas to the north and, worst of all, to Kabul. They will be even more shocked when they find out the Taliban are in the so-called democratically elected government of Afghanistan.